“Christian nationalism” has become a widely maligned target for many in the mainstream and left-wing news media, for many former (especially “exvangelical”) Christians, and for many “nones.” But there are also Christians who (mistakenly, I believe) promote that position.
The term “Christian nationalism” is used, and misused, in a
variety of ways, and it is not easy to define it non-controversially. Here,
though, is a succinct definition by two sociologists that gets to the heart of
the matter:
Christian nationalism is a cultural framework…that idealizes and advocates a fusion of Christianity with American civic life.*1
MORE2
is a local group in the Kansas City area,*2 and its
“clergy caucus” is actively resisting White Christian nationalism—and it should
be recognized upfront that Christian nationalism is largely promoted and
abetted by White (and male) Christians.
The
picture above is of a poster given to each of us who attended the May 9 rally
sponsored by MORE2 and held in Quindaro, Kansas City (Kan.). Stephen
Jones, co-pastor of the First Baptist Church of Kansas City (Mo.), is the
leader of the clergy caucus, and his church
emphasizes the Beloved Community.
There
are many good resources for learning/sharing about the meaning of White
Christian nationalism and its threat to democracy and religious freedom in the
U.S. Here are some of those for you to consider:
◈ The Baptist Joint Committee
on Religious Liberty (BJC) has long been working on issues related to religious freedom and church-state separation. At the meeting on
resisting Christian nationalism organized by Pastor Jones in Kansas City on March
7, a staff member from BJC was the guest speaker.
In 2019, the BJC launched a new movement called “Christians
Against Christian Nationalism.” In December 2022, Time magazine ran a
rather lengthy article about Amanda Tyler, the executive director of the
BJC, and the work of that new group she started.
◈
The documentary movie Bad Faith was released on March 29, and
it is a highly informative film depicting the growth of the Christian
nationalist movement in the U.S. from the 1970s to the present. I encourage you
to read about this powerful film on
their website*2—and to see it, if possible.
In stark contrast to my high praise of Bad Faith, it is
strongly criticized by some conservative evangelicals. For example, a review
on MovieGuide.org says that it is “a bad, abhorrent
piece of progressive propaganda” produced by “Christian socialists” such as
William Barber, the “heretical black activist.”
◈
Jim Wallis’s new book The False White Gospel was published on April
4, and as I wrote in my review of that book,*4 he avers that
the old heresy of white supremacy is now operating with a new name: white
Christian nationalism.
That heresy, he says,
is “the single greatest threat to democracy in America and to the
integrity of the Christian witness” (p. 17).
◈
The Summit for Religious Freedom, conducted by Americans United for the
Separation of Church and State (AU) was held in Washington D.C. on April 14.
The May issue of Church and State (C&S), AU’s monthly periodical, is
largely about that. I encourage you to read
about it here. *5
As Rachel Laser, the Jewish woman who is the president and CEO
of AU, writes in the above issue of C&S, “The wall of separation
between church and state is not a wall that divides us; it’s a wall that unites
us—that ensures no one is favored, that allows us to thrive in our differences.”
In
summary, we who oppose White Christian nationalism need to clearly state
what we are for, not just what we are against (as Wallis emphasizes in the last
chapter of his book). Broadly speaking, we are for the freedom of religion for everyone.
We
are also for the freedom of Black people, Latinx people, Indigenous people,
LGBTQ people, immigrants seeking asylum, and others who are so often mistreated
and scorned by those who foster Christian nationalism. (I will be writing more
about freedom (= Liberty) in my blog post planned for May 30.)
Let’s
resist White Christian nationalism and welcome all into the Beloved Community!
_____
*1
Andrew L. Whitehead and
Samuel L. Perry, Taking America Back for God (2020), p. 10. Whitehead is
also the author of American Idolatry: How Christian Nationalism Betrays the
Gospel and Threatens the Church (2023).
*2
MORE2 stands
for the Metro Organization for Racial and Economic Equity. It was formed in
2004 and is financed by supporting “members,” most of whom are churches in the
area, now including Rainbow Mennonite Church (where I am a member). Ruth Harder
(my pastor) spoke at the beginning and end of the May 9 rally.
*3
One of the many
prominent progressive Christians speaking in that documentary is Randall Balmer,
an ordained Episcopal priest and a professor of religion at Dartmouth College. Balmer (b. 1954) is also the author of Bad Faith: Race and the
Rise of the Religious Right (2021). Further, last month he wrote an
important article on Christian nationalism, published here.
*4
The book review I
submitted to The Englewood Review of Books (ERB) last week is available for
your consideration here. It should be available on the
ERB website before
long.
*5
Last week I learned
that after 20 years of writing for Baptists Today, Baptist News Global,
and Good Faith Media, Thinking Friend Bruce Gourley has become the new editor
of Church and State.
.jpg)
WHITE Christian Nationalism adds a racist component to Christian Nationalism as defined by Whitehead and Perry. But I think it could be argued that simple Christian Nationalism, "a cultural framework…that idealizes and advocates a fusion of Christianity with American civic life" is all but endemic to Christianity throughout American history. Furthermore, if you remove 'American' from that definition, is pretty much endemic to Christian history in general in the Western world. Going a step farther, replace "Christianity' in that definition with most any dominant religion in a given area and it will pretty much hold true as well, as we easily see in nations in which Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism are the dominant religion. This suggests that the antidote to religious nationalism is a deep and abiding commitment not to 'more religion' but rather to a fundamental vision of pluralism critical of all religious claims to superiority as the 'Civil Religion' in the land. Can such a Civil Religion of pluralism really provide the 'glue' of social cohesiveness strong enough to hold a large society together? I think currently the verdict is still out on that question.
ReplyDeleteDan, I much appreciate your thought-provoking comments, and I apologize for not responding earlier in the day. Yes, adding "White" does add a racist component, but the Christian nationalism in the U.S. is overwhelming advocated by White Christians--and many of those are cultural Christians more than intentional followers of Christ. There are few Black Christian nationalists.
DeleteAnd while I agree that Christian nationalism is "endemic to Christianity throughout American history," there have always been Christians in this country who were adamantly opposed to Christian nationalism, including most who were Baptists (at least until the 1980s) dating back to Roger Williams, as well as the Anabaptists, the Quakers, and others. Christians in these traditions sought the separation of church and state, a position that Christian nationalists nearly universally reject.
And, yes, Christian nationalism has been endemic to Christian history in general in the Western world, except for the same groups mentioned in the previous paragraph. At the present time, though there doesn't seem to be many places in the world other than the U.S. where Christian nationalism is particularly strong. It does seem to have considerable strength in Hungary under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, though.
Also, I think you are correct in saying that there has been, and is, religious nationalism that is not Christian in other parts of the world. Perhaps one of the main examples now is Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) in India under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party.
But as Jim Wallis emphasizes in his book, the answer to bad religion (e.g., religion that promotes religious nationalism) is not no religion but better religion (and civil engagement), such that which he advocates in his book (as introduced in the blog article).
Before Normal Dan's thought provoking comments, I received brief words of agreement/appreciation from three Thinking Friends, the first was from local TF Sue Wright who lives nearby in Liberty. She wrote, "Amen and amen!"
ReplyDeleteA few minutes later, TF Michael Willett Newheart, who grew up here in Liberty and now lives in Maryland wrote, "Bravo, Leroy, bravo! Thank you."
About the sane time, TF Mike Greer in Kentucky wrote, "Excellent. Thanks for the resources."
Thanks Sue, Michael, and Mike for these words of affirmation!
Just now I received similar comments from Thinking Friend Bob Hanson in Wisconsin: "Very well said.
DeleteThis is a saver, Leroy; thanks."
A Thinking Friend in Maryland send the following comments by email:
ReplyDelete"Further resources could include "Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation" by Kristen Kobe Du Mez (https://a.co/d/fteAieP). I found this book to be very helpful in tracking the historic progression of our current situation."
There are many good books recently published regarding White Christian nationalism, and Du Mez's book is certainly one of them. I have read several reviews of that book but have read only a bit of the book itself. I appreciate this TF who has read the book sharing her recommendation of it.
DeleteI hope other of you Thinking Friends will share information about books regarding (White) Christian nationalism that you have found helpful.
Local Friend David Nelson, who lives just a few miles west of Liberty in Gladstone, wrote,
ReplyDelete"Thanks for this great post. I have shared it with others on Facebook. I'm sorry I am unable to attend the rally in Liberty in June."
Thanks, David, for reading and responding. I appreciate your sharing a link to this post on Facebook and also for mentioning the rally in Liberty next month (and I am sorry you won't be able to attend).
DeleteFor you in the area who don't have this information, the next MORE (squared) rally is scheduled for noon on June 20. beginning at the Presbyterian Church just off the historic square in downtown Liberty. It is being planned by Dr. David Sallee, former president of William Jewell College. I encourage you local Thinking Friends to attend.
Here are comments received a few minutes ago from Thinking Friend Glenn Hinson in Kentucky:
ReplyDelete"I applaud enthusiastically, Leroy. White Christian Nationalism is especially dangerous when not recognized or thought of as love of country."
Thanks, Dr. Hinson, for your comments. I think there certainly is a legitimate patriotism, but as you say, a serious problem arises when that patriotism becomes White Christian nationalism, which it seems to have become for many USAmericans in recent years.
DeleteThanks, Leroy, for your contribution toward countering Christian Nationalism. Broadway Baptist in Ft. Worth sponsored a three session study of Christian Nationalism. Amanda Tyler was present for one of the sessions. Christian Nationalism is barely, if at all, distinguishable from theocracy. Theocracy, rule of God, sounds pretty good until one asks, with James Dunn, "Who gets to be Theo?"
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing this, Charles. And, yes, there is a close link between emphasis on Christian nationalism and trading democracy for theocracy.
DeleteI was happy to hear that Amanda Tyler was able to be with you for your church's study about Christian nationalism. She was originally scheduled to be the guest speaker at the MORE (squared) rally held at the Metropolitan Missionary Baptist Church in Kansas City (Mo.) on March 7. But after agreeing to come for that gathering, she received an invitation to hear President Biden deliver the State of the Union address, so she, of course, accepted that invitation and sent a staff member to Kansas City in her place.
My wife just now said I should make it clear that Amanda was invited go to the Capitol and to see/hear the President deliver the SOTU message in person.
ReplyDeleteI especially like the line “ we who oppose White Christian nationalism need to clearly state what we are for, not just what we are against”. It made me think about the tension in the Catholic Church between those who hold more conservative, traditional views versus those advocating a more progressive/pastoral (whatever label given I don’t care for the labels we use). I can see beauty and truth on both sides but we tend to focus on throwing grenades at each other instead of recognizing the beauty in the spectrum of religious rituals and practices within our tradition. Unfortunately I think that just drives people away from the Church instead of bringing people closer to Christ.
ReplyDeleteSorry Leroy, I can never seem to figure out how to login from my google account here (even though I came from my gmail ). This is Jim Koger.
DeleteThanks for your comments, Jim, and I'm sorry you have trouble posting with your Google account, which is supposed to work--but I have no idea why it doesn't work for you or what to do about that. If you have to post as "Anonymous," just sign your name at the end and we who read your post will know it is from you.
DeleteThanks for your comments about seeing "beauty and truth on both sides" in the Catholic Church. As a long-time advocate of what I call the radiant center, I applaud your endeavor to enlarge that centrist position rather than foster polarization.
But sometimes stating what we are for necessarily means rejecting what we think is wrong and detrimental to others and to society as a whole. I firmly believe, as does Jim Wallis, that White Christian nationalism is deterimental to the Christian Gospel and to the democratic form government. So being for the Gospel and democracy, necessarily means opposing White Christian nationalism and rejecting "bothsideism." But the latter can and should be done without "throwing grenades" at those with whom we disagree.
"detrimental" was misspelled above; sorry about that
DeleteThank you Leroy! I so appreciate your ability to be brief, incisive and relevant and with more reading links if we want to go further. I have been reading about the Christian Right in the USA for about 18 months. I too liked Jesus and John Wayne. Any form of Nationalism is worrying, but Christian Nationalism is doubly problematic. The first English Baptist Thomas Helwys is still an important voice on separation of church and state: "For men's religion to God is between God and themselves. The king shall not answer for it. Neither may the king be judge between God and man. Let them be heretics, Turks [Muslims], Jews, or whatsoever, it appertains not to the earthly power to punish them in the least measure."
ReplyDeleteIt is sad he died in prison for his views, put there by King James, who sponsored the King James Bible.
After 20 years in Independence we have returned to live in Leicester, England, a superdiverse city with 70+ languages spoken daily and 25% of the population, Christian, 24% Muslim, 18% Hindu, 4% Sikh and so on. Although sometimes there are tensions the city in so many ways flourishes. The city has had a strong Nonconformist history (Congregationalist, Baptist, Quaker, Methodist etc) resisting for centuries the established, official Church of England - a form of posh white Christian Nationalism. Nonconformity has made for greater tolerance and has helped this city of many immigrants thrive. Thomas Helwys would be at home here.
Andrew, thank you so much for your comments! And even though you are not a Baptist, I much appreciate your reference to Thomas Helwys (1575~1616), who is sometimes called the "father of religious freedom" (about which I plan to write more in my next blog post). Through John Murton (1585~1626), one of Helwys's close followers, Helwys had considerable influence upon Roger Williams (1603~83), the first Baptist in what became the U.S. (as mentioned in my response to "Normal Dan" above.)
DeleteI have not much more to add to the excellent discussion above, so I will go back to a side thought. You have me thinking about Karl Barth, and his Epistle to the Romans. I read part of it in a college class, then took it to work to read a few years later, made it part way through, and got stuck. Then I tried again a couple of years later, and finally made it all the way through the book.
ReplyDeleteBarth was dancing on the edge of a knife for over 500 terrifying pages, but always found his balance. Then, right at the end, I believe he botched his dismount. Instead of creating a viable post-liberalism, he relapsed into what came to be known as neo-orthodoxy. Now, I think aiming for a new-orthodoxy was a good goal, but he lost what was critical in liberalism, namely a space for scientific examination of religion. I felt then, and feel now, that what he really left behind would better be called pseudo-orthodoxy. He told us to pretend we did not know what we did know. So, for a century, our best theology tried to hide its light under a bushel. It is time to put that light on a candlestick, and to hope that it is not too late.
Thanks, Craig, for your comments about Karl Barth. Back in December 2012, I posted a blog article about Karl Barth, and you might like to go back and (re)read that post. Even though it was about Barth, I concluded, "I was influenced more by another Swiss theologian, Emil Brunner (1889-1962) with whom Barth sometimes disagreed. But they both were advocates of neo-orthodoxy—a theology of the “radiant center,” which I have long emphasized in my teaching and writing." And you may have seen the footnote in my March 10 blog post that made reference to "Revelaiton and Reason," Brunner's book that meant a lot to me when I first read it as a seminary student--and since. Part of the reason I like Brunner more than Barth is because of the place he made for reason as well as revelation. But Barth did not believe in the inerrancy, or literal interpretation, of the Bible, so he was also criticized by the fundamentalists and many conservative Christians. So I hope you will give some more consideration to "neo-orthodoxy," for Brunner as well as Reinhold Niebuhr and many other prominent 20th century theologians were neo-orthodox and still worth paying attention to, in my opinion.
DeleteHere is the link to that 2012 blog post about Barth:
Deletehttps://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/2012/12/in-memory-of-karl-barth.html
About an hour ago, Thinking Friend Eric Dollard in Chicago sent the following pertinent comments:
ReplyDelete"Thanks, Leroy, for your comments about Christian nationalism. I too am a member of Americans "United and receive their monthly newsletter, Church and State. Although only about 25 percent (or maybe less) of Americans support Christian nationalism, that is still a frighteningly high number. But how do we fight it? I agree with Wallis that opponents of Christian nationalism need to state clearly and loudly what they support (i.e., support for equal rights for all and opposition to violence).
"I wonder if these Christian nationalists have ever read the Gospel of Luke."
Thanks for your comments, Eric, and for the important concluding sentence of your first paragraph. In addition to the two examples you gave, prominent among what those of us who are opponents of Christians nationalism are for is religious liberty (which, of course, is closely related to equal rights) for all. I will be writing more about that in what will probably be my next blog post.
DeleteOne more bibliographical note: "ThePsychology of Christian Nationalism" by Pamela Cooper-White. She was with us at Broadway for one of our sessions via Zoom.
DeleteI believe I mentioned in a response to an earlier blog I have little patience with "religious" nationalism much less Christian nationalism. I currently serve as an interim pastor in a small Baptist church having flunked retirement as so many have. I don't want to have the new pastor face a mess when he comes. So I have to be careful as I deal with the fact an American flag flies in the church cemetery. As said before, I see church property belonging to the Kingdom of God, not the USAmerica. The Kingdom flag should be out there, not the Stars and Stripes.
ReplyDeleteAll I have read about Christian nationalism are a few articles and your blogs. I feel like I live in the middle of it with Trump banners everywhere and rights to have guns placed above rights to free speech. Every Protestant church seems to have multiple American flags flying above their one Christian flag. I feel strongly we would have more people seeking that 'Radiant Center' if the rhetoric would seek common ground instead of pushing to the extremist positions on left and right. Multiple positions espoused by the left I find highly objectionable, but to go to the extreme others to the right of me is just disgusting. Compromise may be a dirty word to some, but I have no problem seeking the common ground before staking out the size of my tent of essentials.
Thanks, Tom, for these thoughtful comments. The situation you describe in North Carolina where you live now seems to be similar in rural communities across the nation, especially in the South, Midwest, and West except for the states bordering the Pacific Ocean. That may be the way it is in Meade County, Kentucky, where we first met 65 years ago (!) this summer. I am afraid I would have a hard time serving as pastor of Ekron Baptist Church now, but I have not contact at all with the church for a long time and don't know how conservative (or progressive?) it is at present.
DeleteI have not only proposed and promoted the "radiant center" but have also recommended that we seek to make that center as broad as possible. But I agree that there are extremes on both sides that cannot with integrity be included in that desirable middle position. I also think that we who are Christians should seek to understand as fully as possible the reasons people are on the extreme right or the extreme left and that no matter how much we might disagree, we should seek to have malice toward none and charity for all.
Meanwhile, here is an article about how Christian nationalism is moving forward in Texas:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.texastribune.org/2024/05/28/texas-gop-convention-elections-religion-delegates-platform/
And this morning, I saw this new post about the making and significance of the documentary film "Bad Faith":
ReplyDeletehttps://religionnews.com/2024/05/30/bad-faith-sounds-the-alarm-on-the-past-and-future-of-christian-nationalism/